The God Gene, and the Religious Establishment

I have read and heard many interesting testaments of Faith. These “testimonies” encapsulated the infuriating dichotomy that exists between individual Godliness (or goodness) and the many varied institutionalised interpretations of the purported Word of God.

While I concur with, and applaud, the concept of individual belief in a "Higher Purpose," or "Supreme Being," (the "God gene," if you would) I have trouble with the religious Establishment generally (I have had the pleasure of knowing some true "social shepherds" in many religions and they are the obvious and commendable exception to this generalisation). While the world's holy books contain many wise and profound guidelines for a pragmatic and just social order, the codification of such guidelines into dogma has always caused me worry. The only proof that the individual has as to the validity of written "Divine Revelation" is the word of the Establishment that serves that particular revelation, and, perhaps, a gut feeling that "hmmm...this seems right." Who is to say that the particular writer was not politically motivated, or driven by fear of retaliation by the religious establishment of the day, or had consumed a strange fungus (as in the case of many aboriginal cultures) that helped him see truth clearly, or had starved himself (as in the case of other cultures) until he saw visions, or had flagellated himself until he "perceived the truth," or just made up a bunch of stuff to enhance his name as a prophet or mystic.

We know and understand what the proper use of words can do, and the power that they have. Because of this knowledge I fear what misuse or misinterpretation of written word can bring about. The same applies, perhaps even moreso, to oral histories: we have all played the parlour games in which a whispered message is passed around the room, and laughed at how the final message varied from the original. In the final analysis I must believe that the final arbiter of "the will of God" rests with thinking individuals. Whether the Voice of God speaks to one as one's conscience, one's pastor, one's Holy Book, one's guru, saint, or prophet, the decision to listen and the interpretation of what is said rests with the individual, and does not, therefore lend itself to proselytisation or external codification.

In a universe of unfathomable mystery and complexity I must suspect anyone who says to me "this is the only truth." A certain amount of Faith (or faith) should be a part of anyone's personal journey through life, but to abandon logic and the quest for truth and understanding completely to faith in what is unknowable, or faith in what is written, or faith in what has been said, seems, to me, to be abandoning one's worthiness to participate in, or be a part of, any "Higher Purpose."

All of the foregoing is, of course, mho (my humble opinion), and is not intended to detract from, or denigrate the beliefs or opinions or anyone of any and all religious affiliations, or lack thereof, but merely to further, through discussion, my own perception of the unknowable.